SR - ballots results

[Brent Hanner]

gptaylor wrote:
> 
> Brent Hanner wrote:
> 
> >
> > About 1 month and 2 weeks looks to have been allowed.  I would say you
> > have a point of conflict only if the seneschall that recieved the ballots was
> > not the one who was officially seneschall at the time of your populace durring
> > that time span.
> 
> Okay...so what I read from this is...."Bad Bjornsborg!  No Cookie!  During your
> seneschal transition, your seneschal missed an arbitrary deadline that spanned a
> single populace meeting, and your group does not deserve to give input on a regional
> name as a result."

Without a point of conflict that pretty much sums it up.  Once the rules
were set
it was public knowledge how it was to work.  There was no one
particularly vocal
about the time given for the vote or concerns of a posible problem in
any of the 
groups with the way it was being handled.
 
> Regarding the phrase, "Point of Conflict"....Conflict shouldn't be involved in
> this...this name is supposed to help bring unity to the region.  But...conflict would
> assuredly result if a group were excluded from voting under the circumstances
> described above.

A point of conflict in this situation is a justified and rational
problem with something
not a conflict as in fighting.  I agree that is the purpose that those
who are for the
name are trying to accomplish.
 
> However...what is written above really doesn't apply to the true circumstances of
> Bjornsborg's lack of participation, which I investigated last night.  Speaking as a
> deputy seneschal of Bjornsborg under both Lady Nara of Fernwell (our outgoing) and
> Lord Dominic MacNamara (our incoming)-  NEITHER of these people received ballots.
> Rather hard to vote under these circumstances.

This is a point of conflict with the vote in regards to your group.  Its
not quite the
situation I described but its not far from it.  I was short sighted in
my statement
thinking that one of them must have recieved them, my bad.  But it means
that the system
failed in some way, it happens, and your group has a legitimate
complaint with the vote.
But if that wasn't the case you wouldn't have that legitimate complaint.

> And inquiries were not made as to why our group, which had been quite
> involved in the naming process and prior voting, didn't respond before "final" tallys
> were posted.

Were inquiries made to the other 4 groups that didn't get thier votes
in?  The system
that was used was long established form of communication that I would
hope doesn't fail
that offten.  It was assumed to have worked but it didn't.
 
> This remains an issue to be hammered out between regional and local seneschals, using
> methods far more efficient than a public mailing list.

Which is where it belonged to begin with.  

Peder

-- 
"It has to be this way," I said, "and truely I shall soon be dead
for here shall I give up my life since I have lost the lovely wife
and that because of my own fault. So it's myself  I shall assault
and seek this so ignoble death.  In truth, I want no life or breath."

Service of Ladies by Ulrich von Lichtenstien
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.